CATs score in top schools

[ramennoddles]

What kind of scores would be expected at a highly selective school? Do CATs truly show potential? Why does the 11+ use reasoning?

V interesting Wombat, thanks. There are so many schools to choose from around here, before you even consider the independents! Obviously great to have lots of possible options, but also makes it a really hard decision (particularly as you don't know which ones you'll actually get offered a place from).

Cakeisalwaystheanswer - I loved your Westminster description

Interested to know the latest views on this thread, which is a couple of years old: what kind of CAT4 scores would be considered suitable for admission to highly selective senior schools?

Hi OP. I can only tell you what the head at our prep told me last year. Firstly, there is a 5 mark “margin of error” with CAT tests, so you have to factor this in. However, they are in the business of guiding children into the “right” schools year after year. They track CAT scores from reception and what they generally find is this -

SPGS, SPS, G&L, LU & Westminster - you need to be 132 plus on average. SPGS particularly, more like 135.

Hampton, LEH and WHS - about 128-130. Not because they are less academic once you get in, but just because the Central London schools are more competitive entry due to numbers applying.

PHS and KGS - about 125.

Ibstock etc I can’t remember, but slightly lower.

So yes, It’s crazy and it’s a bubble. Averages in SW London are totally skewed and if you’re not in the top 2% nationally, you will not get into the SPS, KCS, G&L,or LUs etc. Hundreds of children who are at this level, CAT score-wise, will not get in anyway, even though they do more than adequately in the exams / interviews because there simply aren’t enough places to take all the DC who would actually cope well in these schools. This is why you have to sit 5 schools to raise the odds.

It’s far from being an exact science though. For instance, I was shown in the computer each time one of mine was approaching 11 plus. One of my DDs had been getting 141 Quite a lot over the years.. She got into SPGS and G&L but not LU because she messed up the paper in the day and she knew she had.,Another was getting 130- 135 in some areas sometimes (not all), he got into LU but I was told he wouldn’t get into KCS or SPS because they’d was only about ten places at each at 11 plus (this was a few years back, I know KCS has widened its entry since then). Despite high CAT scores, there were speed processing issues for this DS. The LU comprehension suited him because, although tricky, it was multi choice. So there’s other considerations apart from CAT scores that will affect where they get offers. Some of the most able DC in particular areas can have have spiky profiles - eg if you’re 141 in maths but only average in English this won’t be enough. Plus there are some very bright 141 plus, yet introverted children, who may struggle at an interview, while those with slightly lower CAT scores may just excel more in that kind of area. They also take into account references and other skills - music, sports etc.

Hi

National average is 100
Prep average is 120
So depending on your school choice can be anything above 120 - 141.

Having 1 DC finished and 2 still in the system I think these estimates are too high. The Prep average may be 120 after constant practising of VR/NVR papers and similarly I am sure that they score higher on the national Eng & Maths tests for similar reasons, but this is due to enhanced teaching not inate ability. I would expect to see a similar lift in state pupils undergoing tutoring for 11+ exams.

DS1 just finished at a school which would fit the 132+ criteria from Cos1ma's analysis and I know for fact that the actual average is a lot lower. DS1 is incredibly lazy and I was constantly shown graphs with the schools ability range compared to pupil performance to demonstrate how he was underperforming for his potential. Similarly I know from another school that has excellent results that a number of DCs, bottom 20%, are very average ability and probably nearer to the 100 score.

IMO most biddable DCs can be coached to totally outperform their inate ability for 11+ exams but I don't understand why anyone would want to do so and only a very few do.

Someone much more able than me explains why Harvard and Cambridge actually have a similar IQ intake, ave 125, although they score much highly on the Harvard entrance tests because of constant practice. It's the same with prep school DCs.

pumpkinperson.com/2017/01/17/iq-academic-success/

By coincidence I am tidying up and have just found my Dds CAT scores from Year 7 so I thought I’d post on here. Yes they show potential. She went to a fairly normal comp (C+ average at A Level). Her CAT was 131 and she got AAA. And a big deposit for her first house from us not going private.
Bright child does well shocker.
OP I don’t know what you mean by ‘top’ - you might mean ‘prestigious’ but there’s no need to pay a fortune as the school won’t add that much extra if they have high scores, are reasonably hard working and nothing disastrous happens (illness, family deaths/divorce) to muck it up. It’s the fit of the school for your child and how happy they will be rather a set of CAT scores.

My understanding was that primary schools record CAT scores, not only for the purposes of 11 plus, but for tracking individual progress through the school and particularly, assessing whether their methods of teaching are working for that child. This is how the prep mine were at explained it to me - ie. if a pupils CAT scores in maths are 130, yet she’s in the lower maths set, the question they ask is not “What is SHE doing wrong?” but “What are WE doing wrong?” Because obviously something isn’t working for that child or helping them to reach their potential. CAT test performance and actual academic performance can be two very different things, particularly if there is SEN, confidence or emotional issues affecting the child.,

CAT scores are tracked throughout the school. Most pupils wouldn’t even know they are doing the tests. There’s was never any announcements made and the school had a policy of not sharing the results with parents, except for maybe 11 plus purposes in guiding parents towards realistic school applications. You can’t really tutor children for CAT tests as I understood it? It’s not the same as the kind if VR or NVR you find in exams.

They continue with CAT type tests through senior school, same purpose.

I don't know enough about CATS to agrue the science stuff but my point is that if as it is said that CATs correspond to IQ tests then it is extremely unlikely that the average inate ability of the 7% of kids who's parents have a spare £20k pa in SW London is higher than the average inate ability of Harvard or Cambridge undergraduates. Hence I disagree with the numbers quoted above.

Well there are some schools where the odds of a place at 11 plus are probably worse than for some courses at Oxbridge or Harvard etc. Schools can have 1,300 applicants for 160 places, for instance. This is quite standard. And don’t forget that a lot (most)? of they applicants will already be “pre-filtered” in some way because a large proportion of these will be from prep schools which will tell you in no uncertain terms if they don’t think your child should apply for a certain school, often refusing to write references if they think a child has no chance. The prep reputations on sending the “right” children in to the “right” schools, otherwise their references will hold no sway at the senior schools.

The only schools that have 1300 applicants for 160 places will be state grammar schools and anyone can apply. Tiffin has about that number of applicants and only 22 of the 200 in their last years 6th form got into Oxbridge.
The most selective Indys will have far lower numbers applying because their very nature means that only the very bright apply, SPGS will have far less applicants than Surbiton High School but of a very different ability range.
I have no idea what point you are trying to argue but if it was actually true that pupils at SW London Indys have a higher average inate ability than Harvard undergraduates then said university would send a research team over to test the drinking water.

I’ve no idea about Harvard applications etc but these were the numbers last year -

Latymer Upper - 1,300 for 130 places (about 40 more come from their prep. School is very popular as co-ed and there are less 11-plus options for boys in the area.

SPGS - 700 for 100 places

G&L - 900 for 100 places

I fo know this because I asked the admissions officers of each school and they told me. That was my third time round the 11 plus fiasco and it’s the same every year, with numbers rising.

I’m not saying all these DC will get into Harvard because they won’t, even if they applied. So I don’t know, but those are the numbers.

And many of those applicants will have been “pre-filteted” by preps etc - eg only two from our school were “allowed” to apply for SPGS (probably why the number of applicants there is slightly lower than at G&L). The head won’t write a reference if your child has no chance of a place. Even then, 600 will be rejected for SPGS and 800 for G&L.

SPGS gets 99% 9/8/7 at GCSE ie. virtually nobody gets a Grade B! G&L gets 96-98% so not much difference. Yes there is a range of ability in the schools to an extent, but you can be in the bottom maths set of about ten sets and perceive yourself to be struggling, yet still come out with a “9”. These schools are a bubble really.

I can't confirm your applicant numbers because they are not published but I hope to goodness that they weren't given to you by the same prep head. Last year Oxbridge places:

Latymer 16
SPGS 38
G & L 17

Harvard is much harder to get into than Oxbridge. But still you insist that the inate average ability of a SW London Indy pupil is higher than that of a Cambridge or Harvard undergrad.

I give up.

I’m not insisting nytbing about Harvard undergrads cake. I’ve no idea!

Those Oxbridge results look about right. However that number again will go to US Ivy League. Many will go to too medical schools, or LSE, art schools, music colleges or drama schools, Harvard and Oxbridge aren’t what everyone is even aiming at. There’s 100 in the year. It depends in the course.

DS’ friend is currently in the process of aiming for Harvard. I’m sure he’ll get in, brother already there etc. His parents were educated in the States so this is a normal course for them, whereas it wouldn’t occur to us (not to mention the expense). He’s been on various summer schools there. Doing all the extra curricular requirements, plus the added hassle of SATs etc. I’m sure he’ll get in tbh as they seem to know what they’re doing. He got all “9s” at GCSE, but so did people who want to do art degrees.

You can ring the schools any time and ask for their admissions numbers at 11 plus. It’s common knowledge for anyone applying. G&L registrar told me while DD was in her interview. SPGS registrar told me when I asked. At SPGS, just over 700 sat the computer test which was the first round. Then they recall just over 400 to sit the exam which is all day. Then they interview 200 for 100 places, with maybe 5 or 6 on the waiting list.

LU announce it at the offer holder day. If anything, LU numbers are probably higher now as that was what they were 5 or 6 years ago when he applied. From the 1,300, they interview about 450 (all on one day)! for about 130 places.

I'm laughing at the 135+ CAT for LU. It is a great school, but having direct experience of it, 135 is WAY too high a minimum CAT level.

IN terms of comparisons to Harvard entrance, the comparison is ludicrous. First, acceptance rates at Harvard hover at the 5% level. Acceptance is only minimally based on standardised testing and much more emphasis on high school transcript, essays, and extracurricular activities. Much more difficult that an exam and an interview!

I’m not comparing anything to Harvard as I wouldn’t know about that. I’m just saying what has happened with my own DC so far.

With DS, they showed me his CAT scores in Year 6 and going back to about Year 2 or 3. For the VR, his most recent score had been 135, but the other components were 130 ish. DS had also had a Ed Psych report when he was about 7 as they were concerned about his motor planning skills and some dyspraxia was identified, though some scores were in the 99th centile. Anyway, by Year 6, they said the dyspraxia wasn’t really a significant issue any longer. How ever, they said that he would not get into SPS or KCS because he wasn’t focused or consistent enough. They said they were as sure as they could be he would get into Hampton, which he did. They said to do KGS and Ibstock as safer options which he did and he was offered places there. They said LU was 50/ 50 for him. They said if he could get through the exam, he would probably get in as LU put more emphasis on the interview than other schools and he would do very well in an interview situation. Anyway, as it was, the LU exam suited him because the comprehension was multi- choice, so less writing. I wouldn’t say it’s a high pressure school once they get in and tbh, there’s allsorts there. DS found his subjects he was stronger in, as they all do. He’s stronger in Himsnities and languages. He always thought he was struggling in maths as he was in the second to bottom set out of ten. But he worked really hard in Year 11 and came out with all top grades when he was expecting 7s and 8s. All his friends (say about 15 or so that came her in GCSE day) got either all 9s, or maybe nine 9s and an 8, something like that. No idea what their CAT scores would be these days though.

Hi, I reignited this thread out of interest as my DS is about to go through the ISEB pre-test process this November. I am wondering if his CAT scores are high enough for any of the super-selectives, because mums with D.C. already at these schools have told me stories about average CAT scores at these places (rightly or wrongly as a proxy for IQ) that are eye-watering. DS scored an average of 136 with a break-down as follows: VR 129, NVR 141, Spatial 139, Quant 136. Half of me is wondering whether to put him through this brutal process if he has already ruled himself out with his CAT scores. School are not being very forthcoming with info, hence my question. Please help me decide what to do.

Westbourne - Cos1ma is seriously deluded and I hope that no poster has been put off applying for schools by her ridiculous nonsense. I am just ignoring her now.

Your DS will be very well placed in any school he applies for, obvioulsy getting a place depends on how he performs on the day but if he sits a few he will get most of not all. I assume that you're not at a prep so speak to the schools directly if you have any concerns and they will reassure you. Do not let yourself be put off by strangers posting rubbish on an annonymous forum.

cake - there really is no need to be rude like that. What I have said is 100% the truth as it happened to us. I have gone through 11 plus in this area multiple times with four very different children. This is what happened. What is the problem?

I also have another one who averaged around 100 in the CAT scores with some mild SEN. So average nationally, yet I was told she would not get in to most schools in the area. We applied to More House, Radnor House and St Catherine’s. There were no more options, except for the Hall and she didn’t like it there. She got into one of these schools but has struggled over the years.

That is what happened there.

You can call it all nonsense if you like, but these were experienced heads with 15 years experience in getting childten into schools in this area. They have a excellent track record. This is what they do, year in year out for hundreds of pupils. Why would they make this up? As if it’s not stressful enough for kids and the parents.

They told me that the national average in the country is 100, but the average in that school was 115. And that was a non-selective co-ed prep in SW London that goes 3-11. Other similar schools will be the same. In Putney there is Hurlingham, Prospect House, the Roche - they are all pretty similar. I had DC in these schools over a 10 year period and I’m just saying what happened.

I’ve no idea about CAT scores in later life or Harvard or whatever. This thread is not about that. It’s about 11 plus in this specific area and these specific schools. Go in the school websites or ring them yourself if you think I’m deluded.

Westbourne - I’m sure your DC will be fine.

as a previous poster said, you have to distinguish raw scores that actually reflect natural ability from scores obtained after years and years of drill and preparation. Several heads of non selective told me during visits that the children start out on scores closer to 105-110 but then improve to 120 average by year 5/6. This is the value add of a private prep school I guess. Similarly, at some more selective preps, children might start out at 120 but be prepped to score closer to 125-130 by the time 11+ comes around. So if you want to compare it to IQ scores or scores obtained by the standardisation sample, the top schools would have average scores rather in the 125 range, but with heavy prep now so common, it's possible that higher scores are now the norm in the most selective preps. Am pretty sure the average at Westminster Under was "only" 125 five or so years ago. Given the shape of the bell curve, average of 135 is super unlikely though, the highest score possible is 141.
Also keep in mind children can have a spiky profile, a child might have a score of 125 but get 138 or 141 in quantitative etc, or really high verbal / quant and average spatial, they'd still have a shot at the top schools. There aren't enough geniuses to fill all these super expensive private schools, you do have a much higher rate of "gifted" kids in these schools but also plenty of normal hard working above average and well prepped kids.